Al Shimari v. CACI Premier Technology, Inc., 1:08-cv-00827

Plaintiffs were Iraqi nationals who sued CACI Premier Technology, Inc., a military contractor, alleging torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment at Abu Ghraib under the Alien Tort Statute.
The litigation began in 2008 and included multiple rounds of motions, two trials (the first resulting in a mistrial), appeals, and remands.
In November 2024, a jury awarded each plaintiff compensatory and punitive damages; judgment entered in plaintiffs’ favor.
Plaintiffs filed a Bill of Costs seeking $169,725.59 for trial-related expenses; CACI objected to a significant portion as not allowable under statute.
Plaintiffs agreed to some cost reductions but maintained most were recoverable; the dispute focused on allowable categories and amounts under 28 U.S.C. § 1920 and FRCP 54(d).
The Court reviewed each category of costs, sustaining several objections by CACI and ultimately awarding plaintiffs $102,291.68.

Issue	Plaintiff’s Argument	Defendant’s Argument	Held
Whether all requested costs were taxable under §1920	All were necessary for trial, largely because CACI complicated litigation	Many costs were excessive, unsubstantiated, or not recoverable by law	Court mostly sided with CACI, finding many costs were not taxable or properly substantiated
Recovery of video deposition and transcript costs	Video testimony and expedited/rough transcripts were needed for trial preparation	Video depositions, multiple or expedited transcripts, and real-time transcription were for convenience, not necessity	Only court-ordered videos taxable; others, including many expedited and duplicate transcripts, not recoverable
Reimbursement for witness fees and travel	Full expenses warranted, including beyond local rules, due to necessity for trial	Costs should be limited by local GSA and court rules; unnecessary days and higher rates not recoverable	Court allowed some flexibility for international witnesses but reduced costs for unnecessary days/rates
Exemplification, copying, and interpreter costs	All copying, exemplification, and interpreter support essential for case and approved by CACI	Plaintiffs failed to show which copies or services were used for court purposes versus counsel convenience	Court awarded only adequately substantiated costs and those necessary for testimony; denied graphics/consulting and inadequately documented claims

Cherry v. Champion Int'l Corp., 186 F.3d 442 (4th Cir. 1999) (presumption for awarding costs to prevailing party unless injustice shown)
Teague v. Bakker, 35 F.3d 978 (4th Cir. 1994) (good reasons required to deny costs to prevailing party)
Farmer v. Arabian American Oil Co., 379 U.S. 227 (1964) (court’s discretion to allow travel costs for remote witnesses)